The ethics investigation into Rep. Liz Harris, R-Chandler, is still up in the air as the freshman lawmaker joins an expanding list of state lawmakers who have had ethics probes in recent years.
There is yet to be a ruling on the ethics complaint filed against Harris. House Ethics Committee chairman Rep. Joe Chaplik, R-Scottsdale, said after Harris’ testimony to the committee on March 30 that the complaint was going into advisement for ethics members to consult with legal staff and determine a ruling later.
The complaint was filed by Rep. Stephanie Stahl-Hamilton, D-Tucson, and alleges Harris engaged in disorderly conduct for inviting Jacqueline Breger to a Legislative joint elections hearing. Breger proceeded to accuse several elected officials of participating in a bribery deed scheme with the Sinaloa Cartel, including Gov. Katie Hobbs and Speaker of the House Ben Toma, R-Peoria.
The ethics hearing largely focused on a text exchange submitted as evidence between Harris, Breger and suspended attorney John Thaler. Breger was representing Thaler, who had already presented the claims Breger provided to a federal judge. The judge dismissed them as a “delusional and fantastical narrative,” and House and Senate leadership have criticized Harris for inviting Breger.
Ethics members are considering how much of Breger’s testimony Harris knew before Breger presented to the Legislature, and whether it was a predetermined plan by the three to avoid having Breger’s presentation screened by Toma so she could allege wrongdoing of elected officials.
Harris maintains she didn’t know the specific contents of the presentation and only met Breger a few days before the elections hearing. She said she advised Breger to bring a paper copy of her presentation rather than a digital format due to time constraints, not to circumvent Toma.
She also said she was extremely upset to see Toma on a list of elected officials accused of corruption by Breger, but she also knew about the deed scheme prior to the elections hearing.
“I was led to believe (Breger and Thaler) had information on election issues,” Harris said to the Ethics committee on March 30.
It’s not too often when one of Arizona’s Legislative chambers punishes a member after an ethics complaint has been made against them.
“Very rarely, though increasingly frequent in recent years, have we seen these things actually rise to a level where there is consequences for an action,” said Gaelle Esposito, a lobbyist with Creosote Partners.

Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, had a complaint filed against her both in 2022 and 2021, but neither resulted in any disciplinary action from the Senate.
The 2022 complaint came after Rogers posted a message on social media about the May 14, 2022 shooting that left 10 black people dead in Buffalo, N.Y., in which she wrote “Fed boy summer has started in Buffalo.” The Senate did censure her on March 1, 2022 after she advocated for building gallows to hang and “make an example” out of traitors and threatened to “destroy” the careers of other Senators.
The Senate Ethics Committee dismissed the 2021 complaint against Rogers, which alleged she mistreated a former assistant. That complaint ended up as a civil lawsuit which alleged assault, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and wrongful termination. The lawsuit was settled for $10,000 in March.
Harris said during the ethics hearing that she didn’t believe her actions met federal and state definitions of disorderly conduct. She said she believed a member would have to do something egregious to meet that definition such as an extreme DUI or a fistfight with another member.
Those instances have happened with legislators. Former Democratic Sen. Tony Navarrete had an ethics complaint filed against him after he was charged with multiple sex crimes against children, but he resigned shortly after he was arrested and the complaint was filed.
In 2018, the House of Representatives voted 56-3 to expel former Republican Rep. Don Shooter, who was facing multiple accusations of sexual harassment. Former Republican Rep. David Stringer also resigned in 2019 before an ethics investigation could proceed after he allegedly made racist comments and sex offense charges from the 1980s resurfaced of Stringer paying a boy with intellectual disabilities for sex.
But not all sex-related complaints have ended in a resignation or expulsion. Rep. David Cook, R-Globe, faced a months-long investigation in 2020 alleging he had an affair with a lobbyist to help her get special favors with officials in Pinal County. While the findings of the investigation were “deeply troubling,” it didn’t amount to disorderly conduct the House could punish. Sexual harassment allegations were also made to former Republican Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita that same year, but a formal ethics complaint was never filed.

Former House GOP Communications Director Barrett Marson said Harris’ behavior is not equivalent to previous instances with Shooter and Stringer, but he also said removing Harris’ committee assignments, notably her seat on Municipal Oversight and Elections, could be appropriate.
“Is this a fireable offense, you know probably not. But maybe she loses her perks,” Marson said. “That probably is a pretty appropriate response.”
Marson pointed out the extensive questioning conducted by Rep. Travis Grantham, R-Gilbert, to Harris during the ethics hearing. He said Grantham seemed “frustrated, perplexed, and at times, speechless” to the text exchange between Harris, Breger and Thaler.
“I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a lawmaker more frustrated with a member of his own party than Grantham was,” Marson said.
Stan Barnes, a lobbyist with Copper State Consulting Group and former Republican legislator, said the options the Ethics committee could recommend are wide open, but the entire House would have to vote on that recommendation.
“They could recommend no action. They could never meet again and never talk about it again. Any scenario you want to imagine, they could do,” Barnes said.